merjet

Rep. Ilhan Omar

Recommended Posts

“We are not really in the business of asking for the share of that power. We are in the business of trying to grab that power and return it to the people.” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) Link.

Of course, "return it to the people" is a transparent cover for giving immense powers to Omar and a few like-minded with her to satisfy their power lust.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, merjet said:

“We are not really in the business of asking for the share of that power. We are in the business of trying to grab that power and return it to the people.” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) Link.

Of course, "return it to the people" is a transparent cover for giving immense powers to Omar and a few like-minded with her to satisfy their power lust.

 

"They" promised that when women had their fair share of powerful positions things would be better. Instead little difference is seen after equitable gender equality. Some behavior is more frequently observed in different genders but "wrong" behavior can show up due to bad premises,  thinking, and goals too.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, merjet said:

“We are not really in the business of asking for the share of that power. We are in the business of trying to grab that power and return it to the people.” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) Link.

Of course, "return it to the people" is a transparent cover for giving immense powers to Omar and a few like-minded with her to satisfy their power lust.

Merlin,

I agree.

Now a shit-storm is coming the size of which I doubt Rep. Omar calculated.

She also said the following recently:

She claims she loves America more than citizens born in America.

I believe there are a lot of citizens born in America who simply do not know who she is. But now, many of them know who she is. And in the upcoming days, many more will know who she is.

Continuing:

I hope Omar likes her newly-enhanced fame. And her cohorts, too.

The funny part about this is that, by using his bullhorn in this manner, President Trump is going to force these young anti-American progressive women in Congress to say over and over and over how much they love America and talk bad about the places they came from.

:) 

The fringe left will rally around what they will decry as a "racist" comment, but hell, even the establishment Dems, although they will give lip service of support in public, will be secretly glad a gigantic shit-storm will fall on her head.

:) 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw - I think President Trump wants the Dems to call him and his supporters racist--the more hysterical the better.

He knows people are sick and fed up with this crap.

And the Dems, poor things, can't help themselves.

It's gonna be a nice windfall election for the Republicans.

:) 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, wasn’t that the same kind of line they used in Iran before the revolution? “returning power to the people”.  That worked out well....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 SENATE DEMOCRATS INTRODUCE ‘FOR THE PEOPLE’ ACT TO PUT POWER BACK IN THE HANDS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

If these Democrats were truly serious about returning power to the people, they would not be doing this. Instead, they would create a referendum for the people -- for all eligible voters -- to vote on, giving said voters the power to decide.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's Wall Street Journal opinion section includes Can Ilhan Omar Overcome Her Prejudice? The author, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was born in Somali. The article is pay-walled, but here are some excerpts: 

"Muslim anti-Semitism ... is anti-Semitism’s most zealous, most potent and most underestimated form."

"The problem of Muslim anti-Semitism is much bigger than Ilhan Omar. Condemning her, expelling her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, or defeating her in 2020 won’t make the problem go away.

Islamists have understood well how to couple Muslim anti-Semitism with the American left’s vague notion of “social justice.” They have succeeded in couching their agenda in the progressive framework of the oppressed versus the oppressor. Identity politics and victimhood culture also provide Islamists with the vocabulary to deflect their critics with accusations of “Islamophobia,” “white privilege” and “insensitivity.” A perfect illustration was the way Ms. Omar and her allies were able to turn a House resolution condemning her anti-Semitism into a garbled “intersectional” rant in which Muslims emerged as the most vulnerable minority in the league table of victimhood."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vox tries to explain how 4 congresswomen came to be called “the Squad”.

One meaning of "quad" is "a rectangular area surrounded on all sides by buildings." Of course, a rectangle has 4 sides. Another meaning is "one of 4 children born at the same time from the same pregnancy". That doesn't hold strictly for "the Squad," but the 4 are much alike.

Here's another possibility. "Squad" is a compression of "socialist quad."  😊 Hmm. That reminds me of The Gang of Four

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merlin,

Squad (noun): a small group of people having a particular task.

In popular culture, it's a term well known to apply to a group of women (usually young ones) with a close friendship and shared values.  Google "girl squad."  The images alone should give you an idea of how that term is used.

It's a simple, albeit somewhat juvenile, concept.  AOC was showing immaturity when she applied that term to herself and her colleagues in a professional capacity.  Personally, I would distance myself from that in regards my career as I would see it as undermining my professionalism.

 

Peter,

We don't have gender equality.  How many men are nurses?  Or speech therapists?  Or preschool teachers?  Probably about the same percentage of women who are CEOs.  Sadly, it's rare for anyone who talks about equality to look at both sides of the equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dldelancey said:

We don't have gender equality.  How many men are nurses?  Or speech therapists?  Or preschool teachers?  Probably about the same percentage of women who are CEOs.  Sadly, it's rare for anyone who talks about equality to look at both sides of the equation.

Hi Deanna.

We have gender freedom. Precisely the number of men who wanted to be nurses and merited admission to a program, are now nurses. Same for speech therapists, and all the rest.

I was a teacher, or substitute teacher to be exact, for five years. I loved every day at the preschool. In Denver all the pre-K and pre-pre-K classrooms are at one building. Four and five year olds only in the whole building. All the water fountains and sinks are two feet off the floor, its such a cute building to enter. Those days were my favorites in part because the maximum headcount is lower in this age group, so fewer kids to manage. But the big reason was that these classrooms always had two educators, the licensed teacher and the (typically unlicensed) assistant. I was only there because the licensed teacher was out that day and the school must by law place a licensed, background-checked educator in there. But the assistant is there every day, knows what the kids are used to and is used to doing all the "managining." The result was that I really didn't do a damn thing but be a grandfather figure. I would know what to do next when the assistant would say "now we are going to our meeting area, Mr Jon has a book to read to all of you." Later, "Mr Jon will come around to every table and you can tell him about the art you are making."

Nothing against most men, but most men cannot be a preschool teacher. Most women cannot, either, in my humble experience. But more women can do it well than can men.

The genders are not equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 3:05 PM, Jon Letendre said:

Hi Deanna.

We have gender freedom. Precisely the number of men who wanted to be nurses and merited admission to a program, are now nurses. Same for speech therapists, and all the rest.

I was a teacher, or substitute teacher to be exact, for five years. I loved every day at the preschool. In Denver all the pre-K and pre-pre-K classrooms are at one building. Four and five year olds only in the whole building. All the water fountains and sinks are two feet off the floor, its such a cute building to enter. Those days were my favorites in part because the maximum headcount is lower in this age group, so fewer kids to manage. But the big reason was that these classrooms always had two educators, the licensed teacher and the (typically unlicensed) assistant. I was only there because the licensed teacher was out that day and the school must by law place a licensed, background-checked educator in there. But the assistant is there every day, knows what the kids are used to and is used to doing all the "managining." The result was that I really didn't do a damn thing but be a grandfather figure. I would know what to do next when the assistant would say "now we are going to our meeting area, Mr Jon has a book to read to all of you." Later, "Mr Jon will come around to every table and you can tell him about the art you are making."

Nothing against most men, but most men cannot be a preschool teacher. Most women cannot, either, in my humble experience. But more women can do it well than can men.

The genders are not equal.

The genders are equal, although biologically not the same.

Teachers are, indeed, to be admired.  It's not a job I could do. 

We can agree to disagree re: gender freedom.  If speaking from a purely legal perspective, sure, but I sincerely doubt that "precisely the number of men who wanted to be nurses... are now nurses."  There is just too much societal pressure for men to be manly, and nursing (or speech therapy, or preschool teaching or GASP! stay at home parenting) is just not mainstream manly.  Nursing is becoming more so, though.

How that relates to The Squad is just that it's a very typical thing I often see in the workplace.  A woman wants to be equal, and yet she calls herself (and her colleagues) out as part of an exclusive group.  In this case, she chose an unfortunate pop culture reference that puts her in the emotional league of high school girls.  How that relates to the original post is that there are many many women out there who want it all without acknowledging that something must be conceded. 

"We will never have true equality until 50% of organizations are run by women and 50% of homes are run by men."  Paraphrasing Sheryl Sandberg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will never have true equality until 50% of the winners of arm wrestling competitions are women. An interesting phenomenon I have noticed is that there are more "weather ladies" who have a degree in meteorology, and in national sports more females are covering things like football, though there have been complaints about women in the locker rooms. The "hey, look at my thingy" craze has abated.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dldelancey said:

The genders are equal, although biologically not the same.

Teachers are, indeed, to be admired.  It's not a job I could do. 

We can agree to disagree re: gender freedom.  If speaking from a purely legal perspective, sure, but I sincerely doubt that "precisely the number of men who wanted to be nurses... are now nurses."  There is just too much societal pressure for men to be manly, and nursing (or speech therapy, or preschool teaching or GASP! stay at home parenting) is just not mainstream manly.  Nursing is becoming more so, though.

How that relates to The Squad is just that it's a very typical thing I often see in the workplace.  A woman wants to be equal, and yet she calls herself (and her colleagues) out as part of an exclusive group.  In this case, she chose an unfortunate pop culture reference that puts her in the emotional league of high school girls.  How that relates to the original post is that there are many many women out there who want it all without acknowledging that something must be conceded. 

"We will never have true equality until 50% of organizations are run by women and 50% of homes are run by men."  Paraphrasing Sheryl Sandberg.

I suppose preschool teaching and at-home parenting are generally not mainstream manly, no. I was also the at-home with my two daughters. Their mother went back to work after three months leave and I stayed home. I was certainly aware it was not mainstream, though I never worried about the pressure I may feel from society or what anyone would think about it. I suppose I could wish for society to change, but I didn't need the world to change for me so I guess I just never thought of it.

The genders are different and 50/50 is forced and artificial and its achievement would require deviations from freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dldelancey said:

There is just too much societal pressure for men to be manly, and nursing (or speech therapy, or preschool teaching or GASP! stay at home parenting) is just not mainstream manly.  Nursing is becoming more so, though.

Apparently 75% of nurses are male in Nebraska. But only about 10% nationwide.

Societal pressure. The sexualization of children from every social outlet has been abhorrent. The elites who control these outlets are in a rush to normalize what we will soon be hanging them for. Especially the gender confusion they're pushing to the children is quite destructive, their intention to cripple the masses quite apparent. (Seen Desmond is Amazing? Is sexual enslavement and trafficking (see NXIVM and Cult of Scientology) easier if the next generation is programmed to view it as exciting and liberating?)

Anyway, they're thriving young adults now but I was concerned about my ladies when they were elementary school age. Concerned they could fall victim to the daily barrage of toxic programming. It seems my methods worked because they are having no issues so far. When we are very young and a peer says we are into something totally incorrect for our gender, it can be jolting and scary and can set off a cascade of doubt, confusion and anxiety. I think this method works by inoculating against any value misplaced onto the opinions, the pressure, and by removing anxiety about all of it. I told them the following starting at about age four. Never this whole statement, but one sentence per occasion. And I am mixing phrases that were used at different ages.

You are a girl. I am a boy, a grown-up one, a man. There will always be people everywhere who think they know how you should be but all of them count for nothing and all of them are wrong anyway. There is no such thing as The way to be a girl. Each of us gets to be us, our way. A boy can do things people think girls should do. People think they know how you should be, but they can only know how they want to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2019 at 12:27 PM, merjet said:

Vox tries to explain how 4 congresswomen came to be called “the Squad”.

One meaning of "quad" is "a rectangular area surrounded on all sides by buildings." Of course, a rectangle has 4 sides. Another meaning is "one of 4 children born at the same time from the same pregnancy". That doesn't hold strictly for "the Squad," but the 4 are much alike.

Here's another possibility. "Squad" is a compression of "socialist quad."  😊 Hmm. That reminds me of The Gang of Four

Here is video of one of the four from the Squad, Tlaib, getting her nasty ass 🤢 ejected from a Trump rally in 2016 🤣

He had the right to speak at that venue, he paid for it. She was there to destroy his excericse of his rights. These are the people who lectured us about Trump’s decorum and Presidentiality. Thugs. Vermin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

 

The genders are different and 50/50 is forced and artificial and its achievement would require deviations from freedom.

Artificial, yes. This need and drive for proportional representation in all fields is a depressing sign - the social engineering of group-identity that promotes mediocrity at the expense of quality, and lowers everybody. As for comparative gender ability, I've always asked: where are the female songwriters? Why haven't as many women too, written those good lyrics as prolifically as men have and do, going back over fifty years. A great song is a great song, period. It will sell to the market and make mega-profits, if created by a female or male, equally. So don't tell me woman talent is being held down by "male-dominated industry" ..bla bla - women performer-singers have always been highly packaged/promoted and female listeners are as big buyers as males. One can only gather that men, as a whole, have higher proficiency and motivation for song/music creation. Why that's so is puzzling. Look up online the proportions of m/f song artists and one still sees the lame, politically correct excuses to explain this imbalance: https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/01/188950/women-music-study-female-artists-producers-underrepresented-grammys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, anthony said:

Artificial, yes. This need and drive for proportional representation in all fields is a depressing sign - the social engineering of group-identity that promotes mediocrity at the expense of quality, and lowers everybody. As for comparative gender ability, I've always asked: where are the female songwriters? Why haven't as many women too, written those good lyrics as prolifically as men have and do, going back over fifty years. A great song is a great song, period. It will sell to the market and make mega-profits, if created by a female or male, equally. So don't tell me woman talent is being held down by "male-dominated industry" ..bla bla - women performer-singers have always been highly packaged/promoted and female listeners are as big buyers as males. One can only gather that men, as a whole, have higher proficiency and motivation for song/music creation. Why that's so is puzzling. Look up online the proportions of m/f song artists and one still sees the lame, politically correct excuses to explain this imbalance: https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/01/188950/women-music-study-female-artists-producers-underrepresented-grammys

It makes sense evolutionarily. Women don’t have to woo men, just indicate receptiveness. Men get nothing by merely indicating receptivity, we have to perform to be selected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

It makes sense evolutionarily. Women don’t have to woo men, just indicate receptiveness. Men get nothing by merely indicating receptivity, we have to perform to be selected.

This is close to my opinion; men have traditionally been more earnest and romantic -- because they HAD to be. Popular music for a long time reflected that emotional adulation of women, (occasionally descending to sentimentality). The flavor of songs has changed dramatically since. Lately, as women have become very assertive, initiating contact with men much more, is the reason that songs by males have turned less romantic, more cynical and quite passive, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 4:43 AM, anthony said:

Artificial, yes. This need and drive for proportional representation in all fields is a depressing sign - the social engineering of group-identity that promotes mediocrity at the expense of quality, and lowers everybody. As for comparative gender ability, I've always asked: where are the female songwriters? Why haven't as many women too, written those good lyrics as prolifically as men have and do, going back over fifty years. A great song is a great song, period. It will sell to the market and make mega-profits, if created by a female or male, equally. So don't tell me woman talent is being held down by "male-dominated industry" ..bla bla - women performer-singers have always been highly packaged/promoted and female listeners are as big buyers as males. One can only gather that men, as a whole, have higher proficiency and motivation for song/music creation. Why that's so is puzzling. Look up online the proportions of m/f song artists and one still sees the lame, politically correct excuses to explain this imbalance: https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/01/188950/women-music-study-female-artists-producers-underrepresented-grammys

There is nothing forced or artificial about saying to young girls "you could be a CEO" and then in the next breath saying to young boys "you could be a stay-at-home parent."

It only becomes artificial and forced when you attempt to fit an individual into a role that she or he doesn't want or isn't suited for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dldelancey said:

There is nothing forced or artificial about saying to young girls "you could be a CEO" and then in the next breath saying to young boys "you could be a stay-at-home parent."

It only becomes artificial and forced when you attempt to fit an individual into a role that she or he doesn't want or isn't suited for.

Agreed, of course, nothing forced or artificial about those statements to boys and girls.

The forced and artificial part is when your second paragraph comes to life because we demand a 50/50 distribution regardless of statistical gender differences in aptitudes and interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dldelancey said:

There is nothing forced or artificial about saying to young girls "you could be a CEO" and then in the next breath saying to young boys "you could be a stay-at-home parent."

It only becomes artificial and forced when you attempt to fit an individual into a role that she or he doesn't want or isn't suited for.

I'd say it becomes forced and artificial, earlier, when another fitting individual is *denied* access to the role. (on grounds of "equality", 'group' representation, etc.) That's a grievous interference in rational, self-interested choices between two free agents, too.

Then - as effect -  you'll get less capable, maybe disinterested individuals unsuited to the position who are given the "role"..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...